Curtis Reeves gets bond set at 150K (Spring Hill: school, gardens)

[Zaba]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

What makes you think he is or was miserable?

People who shoot other people over throwing popcorn tend to have an inherent selection bias for personal misery.

Or, to put it another way, there are some things that you'll never, encounter happy people doing. That is one.

[Spring Hillian]

Originally Posted by Zaba

People who shoot other people over throwing popcorn tend to have an inherent selection bias for personal misery.

Or, to put it another way, there are some things that you'll never, encounter happy people doing. That is one.

Another one hung up on believing that the throwing of popcorn was the reason Reeves decided to exercise deadly force. The situation escalated after the popcorn. Not during, not because of.

[ChuteTheMall]

He may or may not be innocent until proven guilty, but he's already served about 6 months without being found guilty. He was serving an indefinite sentence with no trial even yet scheduled. In America.

I guess the media was more interested in this one case than other two or three murders per day that Florida averages.
Or the ten times as many rapes per day.
Or the hundred times as many violent crimes per day.
Florida Department of Law Enforcement

If he is found guilty of second degree murder as charged, the minimum mandatory sentence is 5 years,
and he has already completed 10% of that without being found guilty.
He should either have been out on bond or put on trial within weeks of his arrest, if not within days.

The right to a speedy trial and the concept of innocent until found guilty no longer exist in what's left of America. You can rot in jail waiting for a speedy trial if the media doesn't like you.

[lizardspock]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

Another one hung up on believing that the throwing of popcorn was the reason Reeves decided to exercise deadly force. The situation escalated after the popcorn. Not during, not because of.

The video clearly shows Reeves shoot immediately after Oulson launches his popcorn. You're vehemently defending someone who is very likely a murderer.

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by lizardspock

The video clearly shows Reeves shoot immediately after Oulson launches his popcorn. You're vehemently defending someone who is very likely a murderer.

I have watched the video over and over and I cannot clearly see when the shot was exactly fired. The video was shot from too far away and is not the clearest. I think people are coming to the conclusions that they want to see. Very much reminds me of how people were talking about George Zimmerman and how he was going to be convicted, before they saw all the facts.

Again, innocent until proven guilty!

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall

He may or may not be innocent until proven guilty, but he's already served about 6 months without being found guilty. He was serving an indefinite sentence with no trial even yet scheduled. In America.

I guess the media was more interested in this one case than other two or three murders per day that Florida averages.
Or the ten times as many rapes per day.
Or the hundred times as many violent crimes per day.
Florida Department of Law Enforcement

If he is found guilty of second degree murder as charged, the minimum mandatory sentence is 5 years,
and he has already completed 10% of that without being found guilty.
He should either have been out on bond or put on trial within weeks of his arrest, if not within days.

The right to a speedy trial and the concept of innocent until found guilty no longer exist in what's left of America. You can rot in jail waiting for a speedy trial if the media doesn't like you.

Well said.

[Zaba]

Originally Posted by Spring Hillian

Another one hung up on believing that the throwing of popcorn was the reason Reeves decided to exercise deadly force. The situation escalated after the popcorn. Not during, not because of.

Reeves decided to use deadly force becase Reeves is one of those morons who is a 'worst case scenario' daily firearm carrier. He felt 'disrespected' and shot a man over it.

That's about where the evidence is in this case.
Will Reeves attorney weave an elaborate narrative about how he 'felt threatened' and how it totally justified what he did?
Yes.

Will cops and deadly-force-in-response-to-perceived-disrespect psychos 'believe' it?
Yes.

Will sane people 'believe' it?
Of course not.

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by Zaba

Reeves decided to use deadly force becase Reeves is one of those morons who is a 'worst case scenario' daily firearm carrier. He felt 'disrespected' and shot a man over it.

That's about where the evidence is in this case.
Will Reeves attorney weave an elaborate narrative about how he 'felt threatened' and how it totally justified what he did?
Yes.

Will cops and deadly-force-in-response-to-perceived-disrespect psychos 'believe' it?
Yes.

Will sane people 'believe' it?
Of course not.

Yeah I think you might be right. He spent 71 years shooting people up left and right just because he was getting upset. I guess it was just dumb luck that in his 72nd year he was actually on film shooting somebody. Damn technology.

[Zaba]

Originally Posted by PriusH8r

Yeah I think you might be right. He spent 71 years shooting people up left and right just because he was getting upset. I guess it was just dumb luck that in his 72nd year he was actually on film shooting somebody. Damn technology.

One bad decision can ruin your life but yeah. Swell logic you got going there.

If someone hasn't gunned anyone down before, then that means they're justified whenever they do gun someone down. Hostile encounters with other people are pretty rare for all but the most provocative *******s. We see how he handled this one. The subculture of psychos who think that responding with a firearm is basically the correct answer to every situation are marginal kooks, but loud on the internet.

[The Villages Guy]

Originally Posted by Zaba

One bad decision can ruin your life but yeah. Swell logic you got going there.

If someone hasn't gunned anyone down before, then that means they're justified whenever they do gun someone down. Hostile encounters with other people are pretty rare for all but the most provocative *******s. We see how he handled this one. The subculture of psychos who think that responding with a firearm is basically the correct answer to every situation are marginal kooks, but loud on the internet.

I think you misunderstood the point.